Road Bike, Cycling Forums banner
1 - 20 of 61 Posts

·
Banned forever.....or not
Joined
·
24,425 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Richard Clarke made his much-anticipated appearance before the 9/11 commission this afternoon and, right out of the box, delivered a stunning blow to the Bush administration—the political equivalent of a first-round knockout.

The blow was so stunning, it took a while to realize that it was a blow. Clarke thanked the members for holding the hearings, saying they finally provided him "a forum where I can apologize" to the victims of 9/11 and their loved ones. He continued, addressing those relatives, many of whom were sitting in the hearing room:Your government failed you … and I failed you. We tried hard, but that doesn't matter because we failed. And for that failure, I would ask … for your understanding and for your forgiveness.

End of statement. Applause. KO.


James Thompson entered the ring with a swagger, holding up a copy of Clarke's new book in one hand and a thick document in the other. "We have your book and we have your press briefing of August 2002," he bellowed. "Which is true?" He went on to observe that none of his book's attacks on Bush can be found anywhere in that briefing.

Clarke calmly noted that, in August 2002, he was special assistant to President Bush. White House officials asked him to give a "background briefing" to the press, to minimize the political damage of a Time cover story on Bush's failure to take certain measures before 9/11. "I was asked to highlight the positive aspects of what the administration had done and to play down the negative aspects," Clarke said, adding, "When one is a special assistant to the president, one is asked to do that sort of thing. I've done it for several presidents."

Nervous laughter came from the crowd—or was it from the panel? The implication was clear: This is what I used to do and—though he didn't mention them explicitly—this is what Condi Rice and Stephen Hadley are doing now when they're defending the president.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2097750/
 

·
With the Radio On...
Joined
·
965 Posts
In this corner, weighing in at 850lbs: Guns&Roses!

For the sake of argument:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A25466-2004Mar25.html

This is where partisanship gets us all screwed. There is a common goal in the macro view but we get caught up in the Washington blame game. None the less, I agree this admin. should be served an eviction notice.

"Get in the Ring!"
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,079 Posts
so, he's a liar

So, he admits he'll lie to keep his job, or lie for money. He doesn't appear to claim it was out of some sort of loyalty, as he's fairly well disproven that possibility.

If he'll lie for money, at which point in time did he have more money at stake, when it was a civil service job or a big book deal?

Doug

MR_GRUMPY said:
Richard Clarke made his much-anticipated appearance before the 9/11 commission this afternoon and, right out of the box, delivered a stunning blow to the Bush administration—the political equivalent of a first-round knockout.

The blow was so stunning, it took a while to realize that it was a blow. Clarke thanked the members for holding the hearings, saying they finally provided him "a forum where I can apologize" to the victims of 9/11 and their loved ones. He continued, addressing those relatives, many of whom were sitting in the hearing room:Your government failed you … and I failed you. We tried hard, but that doesn't matter because we failed. And for that failure, I would ask … for your understanding and for your forgiveness.

End of statement. Applause. KO.


James Thompson entered the ring with a swagger, holding up a copy of Clarke's new book in one hand and a thick document in the other. "We have your book and we have your press briefing of August 2002," he bellowed. "Which is true?" He went on to observe that none of his book's attacks on Bush can be found anywhere in that briefing.

Clarke calmly noted that, in August 2002, he was special assistant to President Bush. White House officials asked him to give a "background briefing" to the press, to minimize the political damage of a Time cover story on Bush's failure to take certain measures before 9/11. "I was asked to highlight the positive aspects of what the administration had done and to play down the negative aspects," Clarke said, adding, "When one is a special assistant to the president, one is asked to do that sort of thing. I've done it for several presidents."

Nervous laughter came from the crowd—or was it from the panel? The implication was clear: This is what I used to do and—though he didn't mention them explicitly—this is what Condi Rice and Stephen Hadley are doing now when they're defending the president.

http://slate.msn.com/id/2097750/
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
781 Posts
Brilliant and devastating

The howls you hear from the Bushies and from the Bushworshippers on ths board are proof that blood was drawn, that blood is on the floor. No one now has to prove Bush is a liar. He is, but that's now irrelevant. The issue now is rank incompetence, and you can't character- assassinate your way out from under the devastating truth now revealed. Though I'm QUITE sure you'll try!
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
14,685 Posts
No point in arguing it Doug. These slimy characters are coming out of the woodwork. I think this will take some time to properly be debunked and exposed for what it is, a smear campaign perpetrated by a disloyal and disgruntled employee who is using the blood of 3000 Americans to make a few million and possibly gain prominent roll in a Democratic administration. It's nothing more than that in quite simple terms. I am not going to argue the issue here any longer. No one is interested in the truth. They see blood in the water. Let them have their day now. I believe there will be a backlash from this that, in the end, will send a lot of these vermin scurrying back into the crevices they once came. That includes Terry McAuliffe, both Clintons and the rest of the Kerry machine. The only criminals who are complicit in this scheme of misinformation that will go unscathed is the media. They will unfortunately be around to continue their partisan misreporting of the news.

 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,760 Posts
He claims he wasn't lying.

DougSloan said:
So, he admits he'll lie to keep his job, or lie for money. He doesn't appear to claim it was out of some sort of loyalty, as he's fairly well disproven that possibility.

If he'll lie for money, at which point in time did he have more money at stake, when it was a civil service job or a big book deal?

Doug
In his testimony on Tuesday, Clarke claimed not to have lied in the briefing. The "I was spinning" is a cute ploy to discredit the briefing, but when you look at his testimony, he didn't deny any of it. The spin might have been that Clarke held back on his feelings concerning the attitude of the Bush admin. towards terrorism. Whether or not they took things urgently enough. But when you look at what Clarke said in the briefing, you'll find that the only thing he can be upset about is the speed of what the administration was doing. Clarke was going to get everything he wanted. It just didn't happen fast enough. Or so he says now...

On the other hand, what he wanted done was first proposed (partly in 1998 and more was added in 2000) to the (ahem) previous administration.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
781 Posts
Steam, did my eyes deceive me yesterday

or did you say the Clintons were conspiring with Al Qaeda? I'd look it up myself, but the format of this board makes it almost impossible to find an old post. Thanks.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
14,685 Posts
I never said that in any thread. Must be the Bourbon or some psychedelic flashback.

 

·
Banned forever.....or not
Joined
·
24,425 Posts
Discussion Starter · #9 ·
The Bushites were given a pop in the nose by this one. I'm sure that they were thinking that this was going to be an "easy kill". It's too bad that he has ruled out a position in the Kerry Administration.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,760 Posts
Thanks for reminding me.

RedMenace said:
The howls you hear from the Bushies and from the Bushworshippers on ths board are proof that blood was drawn, that blood is on the floor. No one now has to prove Bush is a liar. He is, but that's now irrelevant. The issue now is rank incompetence, and you can't character- assassinate your way out from under the devastating truth now revealed. Though I'm QUITE sure you'll try!
I always seem to forget that to the left, "truth" is any accusation you fling out, a "lie" is to deny it, and "character-assassination" is to show someone's dishonesty using their own words. I need to write that down. ;-)
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
14,685 Posts
This is all based on one persons subjective if not dishonest opinion. I might add that the person in question is a failure at preventing acts of terrorism against US concerns and is now profiting from the blood spilled because of his failure.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
781 Posts
I suppose, but keep in mind I will say

d'oh_boy said:
I always seem to forget that to the left, "truth" is any accusation you fling out, a "lie" is to deny it, and "character-assassination" is to show someone's dishonesty using their own words. I need to write that down. ;-)
equally bad things about John Kerry. The only difference between Kerry and Bush is that Bush's faults are dishonesy and laughable incompetence while Kerry's faults are rank opportunism and unbearble, unjustified arrogance. I don't care for either of them, equally. So I'm an utterly unbiased neutral observer telling you Clarke was devastatingly effective, and it's obvious that the Bush attack dogs will stop at nothing and stoop to anything to discredit him, because they know he's right and they know people believe him.

If you want to bash Kerry for awhile, let's have at it. I'll chime in happily. Doesn't change the truth about Clarke/Bush.
 

·
Quiet, daddy's drinking
Joined
·
5,887 Posts
Doug, live steam, WTF!

How is it even possible to critisize someone for "spinning" a story in a news conference after witnessing the spew that had come in the daily press breifings from Ari Fleischer? Give me a break, part of his job was to put a positive spin on what the administration was doing. Instead of killing the messenger why not try to be objective. There are just too many people coming out of this administration with the same stories for them not to have a basis in fact.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,760 Posts
re: WTF!

Turtleherder said:
How is it even possible to critisize someone for "spinning" a story in a news conference after witnessing the spew that had come in the daily press breifings from Ari Fleischer? Give me a break, part of his job was to put a positive spin on what the administration was doing. Instead of killing the messenger why not try to be objective. There are just too many people coming out of this administration with the same stories for them not to have a basis in fact.
I'm not criticizing Clarke for spinning. I think that's a given for someone in that position. But there is a huge difference between lying in the briefing and just putting the best face on something. On Tuesday, he denied saying anything untrue in the briefing. So what he's saying now just doesn't add up to the facts he gave in the briefing.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
301 Posts
Attack dogs grasping at straws.

He's admits he's a liar! He admit's he's a liar! They say it over and over as if it proves something and it doesn't prove one thing except that in Washington when you go out to speak for your boss you're going to put the best face (or *spin*) on things. Doug spins for his clients all the time. It's funny to see him so exercised about Clarke spinning for his former client (boss) as if that fact proves that everything Clarke says for now and forevermore is a lie.

The truth is obvious here, the truth of what Clarke says and the truth of the Republican hatchet job being done on him.
 

·
Banned forever.....or not
Joined
·
24,425 Posts
Discussion Starter · #16 ·
Bushites on a boat trip

Yeah, a boat trip alright............. In Egypt.
Boat trips can be dangerous when there is blood in the water.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
14,685 Posts
They are just disgruntled ex-employees. How can one take Clarke at his word now, considering he claims to have lied in the past? He would be more believable if he wasn't hawking a book. That is the telling part in all of this. The idea that he is profiting from his testimony and the blood spilled by 3000. His greed obviously precedes his desire to set the record straight. He could just as well have released the book at a much later date to at least give the perception he wasn't an opportunist looking to profit. But his greed and Viacom's greed, superceded his conscience.

Did you read Dereliction Of Duty? Did you even ever hear about it? Did it ever get any play on 60 Minutes or any other network programming? No. You know why? Because the Clintonites called up these news outlets and threatened them with retribution. That is not conjecture. That is a fact. Maybe you should read it sometime and discover the truth about who was asleep at the switch, or should I say playing golf and getting head, rather than paying attention to his responsibilities. The guy who wrote that book was with Clinton for two years of his presidency. He had no axe to grind. He is the military officer with the briefcase handcuffed to his wrist that is required to stay with the president. The case contains the codes for war. His impression of Clinton would make you feel disgusted. I highly recommend this book to anyone who is interested in really desiring to know why we didn't get UBL.

 

·
Banned
Joined
·
14,685 Posts
Dereliction of Duty
by Lt. Col. Robert “Buzz” Patterson, USAF (Ret.)
Regnery Publishing, Inc.; ISBN: 0895261405
Hardcover - 256 pages (March 2003)


Lt. Col. Robert “Buzz” Patterson exposes the terrifying, behind-the-scenes story of the years when the most irresponsible President in our history had his finger on the nuclear trigger. Dereliction of Duty is the inside story of the damage Bill Clinton did to the U.S. military and how he compromised our national security. From his laughable salutes, to his arrogant, anti-military staffers, the message came through loud and clear: the Clinton Administration had nothing but contempt for America’s men and women in uniform.

For two years, Patterson was the White House military aide who carried the “nuclear football,” which provides the President with remote nuclear strike capabilities. What he witnessed is shocking. In Dereliction of Duty, Patterson reveals:

  • How Clinton missed a golden opportunity to take out Osama bin Laden long before September 11, 2001
  • Why a minor “family matter” caused the Clintons to scramble a military jet
  • How a young Clinton staffer tried to divert a full Navy carrier battle group just so the President could have a photo-op
  • Why female stewards on Air Force One had to keep their distance from the President
But that’s not all. Colonel Patterson reveals that Clinton treated our nation’s most sensitive secrets and powerful weapons with cavalier disregard, while his aides regarded the military as just another tool for domestic politics.

Dereliction of Duty is the book every American concerned about our national security has been waiting for—written by a military man who was an eyewitness inside the Clinton White House, and who can no longer in good conscience keep silent.
 

·
Banned forever.....or not
Joined
·
24,425 Posts
Discussion Starter · #19 ·
What A Hoot !!

Let's change the subject again and again and again.
Clinton, Clinton, Clinton..........Evil Clinton.

Evil Clarke

Blood IS in the water, and the sharks are getting close.
 

·
Banned
Joined
·
14,685 Posts
The last laugh is the one that matters. The democtrats, fools that they are, should have waited until closer to the election for this smear. There is plenty of time to prove who was doing what and when about AQ and who is lying for profit and politial gain.
 
1 - 20 of 61 Posts
Top